Dismissed

Khader Kunju K.M. v. the District Collector

Kerala HC4 Dec 2014WP(C)/2768/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court held that while a detailed enquiry must be conducted into the genuineness of a disputed patta in government land, this does not debar the petitioner from paying the basic tax, which the respondents are directed to accept. The writ petition was disposed of accordingly.

What did the court decide?

Directions to respondents to accept basic tax; respondents to conduct enquiry into genuineness of patta.

Khader Kunju K.M. Vs the District Collector — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2014/13TH AGRAHAYANA, 1936

¶5

WP(C).No. 2768 of 2014 (U)

¶6

PETITIONER :

¶7

KHADER KUNJU K.M.,S/O MYTHEEN,AGED 59 YEARS, KUTTIKATTU CHALIL HOUSE, KDH VILLAGE, MUNAR, IDUKKI DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.N.K.KARNIS

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, PAINAVU, IDUKKI DISTRICT- 685 603

¶11

2. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, DEVIKULAM, IDUKKI DISTRICT -685 613

¶12

3. THE TAHASILDAR, DEVIKULAM TALUK, TALUK OFFICE, DEVIKULAM, IDUKKI DISTRICT -685 613

¶13

4. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KDH VILLAGE, MUNNAR, IDUKKI DISTRICT -685 612

¶14

R1 TO R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.T.R.RAJESH

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04-12-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

sts

¶17

WP(C).No. 2768 of 2014 (U)

¶18

APPENDIX

¶19

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶20

EXHIBIT P1	TRUE COPY OF THE PATTA BEARING NO 13937 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P2	TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED BEARING NO.1743/1998 DATED 18/7/1998
EXHIBIT P3	TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT DATED 27-08-1998
EXHIBIT P4	TRUE COPY OF THE ENQUIRY REPORT DATED 16-09-2002
EXHIBIT P5	TRUE COPY OF THE NOC DATED 20-12-2002
EXHIBIT P6	TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT DATED 07-05-2013
EXHIBIT P7	TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION
EXHIBIT P8	TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 13-01-2014 UNDER RTI ACT
EXHIBIT P9	TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 19-12-2012 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT

¶21

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.S.TO.JUDGE

sts

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J.

¶26

- - - - W.P.(C).No. 2768 OF 2014

¶27

¶28

Dated this the 4^th day of December, 2014

¶29

JUDGMENT

¶30

The petitioner claims to be in possession of the property in Sy.No.62/28A of KDH village of Devikulam Taluk. The petitioner approached this Court on account of non acceptance of the land tax.

¶31

In this matter, a counter affidavit has been filed by the first respondent. It is stated that an extent of 60 acres and 87 cents of property is comprised in survey number 6/28A in KDH village of Devicolam Taluk. An extent of 11 Acres and 96 cents is recorded as road and thodu puramboke. As the land in Survey No.62/28A is Government land, the patta cannot be issued in the same survey number. Therefore, a detailed enquiry is essential to prove the genuineness of the patta. In view of the above, the petitioner's request for acceptance of land tax cannot be acceded to. The petitioner claims the right to pay basic tax based on the patta. The

¶32

W.P.(c).No.2768 of 2014 : 2 :

¶33

genuineness of the patta has to be enquired into. However, that will not debar the petitioner from paying the basic tax. The respondents can accept the basic tax. Acceptance of land tax from the petitioner will be made subject to the result of the enquiry being conducted to prove the genuineness of the patta .

¶34

With the above liberty, there shall be a direction to the respondents to accept the basic tax from the petitioner in respect of the property situated in Sy. No.62/28A in KDH village of Devicolam Taluk.

¶35

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶36

Sd/-

¶37

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, Judge.

¶38

dpk

¶39

/True copy/ PS to Judge.

¶40

W.P.(c).No.2768 of 2014 : 3 :

Khader Kunju K.M. v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Khader Kunju K.M. v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jose Vs State of Kerala

R.Jagan Vs Revenue Divisional Officer, Thiruvalla

Praveen.W.J. Vs the Managing Director,Serifed,Trivandrum

Suhail T.S. Vs Vijaya Bank

C.K.Molamma Vs the Union of India

P.T.P.Kunhamina Vs State of Kerala